I propose, that girls are more shallow and stupid than boys. This may appear sexist, but I give a balanced argument. 99% of people nowadays in some way are stupid whatever das sex. I included we just lack any intelligence understanding tolerance of certain things. I for example lack awareness of things which I do not want to know I automatically dismiss and am also one ignorant bugger.

Nevertheless, my ignorance is but the negligible 1/1840 proton mass of an electron prae that of girls whom I know. Now I try to be friendly, nice bishop, but sometimes you have to say go home dear go home. 17 years of life you would think that she might know this. Here is das Story:

We shall make it into ein Rollenspiel! I am B for boy, she is G, for germination. Stage directions in latin for a laugh.

OH, it is Swedish, but lines later he writes in German, and that creates confusion in me.

Now, seriously, I’ll will not vote for anything, since I strongly believe that the above chat is purposely transferred wrong. I will make a try to render the conversation as it really happened:

B: Dat asian girl is HOT
G: She's chinese (you see clearly that that Girl didn’t spoke the word “No” and no one has heard her saying it!)
B: (that Boy now tries to look smart and thinks he knows better!) Yes...but china is in asia
G: (that Girl has caught the sarcasm of that Boy, who btw. didn’t get her tense of humour, and smiling ironically in an innocent yet lofty way pretends not to understand anything.) Is it?
B exit (feels as if trapped in his own trap, ashamed and looking down exits)

Well, we see clearly enough that boys are not always smart, even if they look so. Does it confirm that girls are dumber? Maybe.

What are you talking about mate! You will try to render it as it really happened? Your incredulity has driven you to indeed inverse the truth for she honestly did not know china to be in asia. I can detect sarcasm a mile off try not to insult my super judgement.

I’m sure you can detect sarcasm, no one is questioning this, but can you hide it? That girl played with your emotions; that’s sure!

You could stay in the scene and with a bright smile in your face answer here with an equal if not greater irony, as if you didn’t know for sure and great pains in your face: “Is it not?” And embracing her in your huge arms, burst in great laughter. The exit was a sign of defeat, no doubt about that.

Nope, you are again wrong.
The real problem lies not in their chromosomata, but in ours. Trust me on that. There is something wrong with our minds and our chromosomes command us to look things that don't exist and we don't perceive them as they really are. We see them as very lovely innocent creatures, that are very weak and have to be protected by us, and their ignorance, well they are by far away from any such things. Girls are devilish, evil things. A smile from her and your heart starts to beat high. Have you ever questioned yourself why this happens? They are evil witches, are masters of secret sciences and able to subjugate your mind to their commands. They pretend to be innocent and weak and very ignorant, but they are not. That's the only truth.

Actually too much of them pretends to be intelligent and 'strong' and 'independent'. Then they come to me and know they can't step to me so they humbly revert to their real personalities. I can also control my heart beat if a girl is up on me. But then again if you wish to live why would you want to control yourself das Y Chromosome is a natural stimulant dieses Bischofs!

Wait, no, that wasn't your question, though, was it? You were asking about boys and girls. In that case, the answer is neither.

In reading through your posts, and after helping my poor husband in grading the exams turned in by his pathetic college students I've come to the conclusion that 99.999999% of the humans on this planet under the age of 21 are dumb as a sack of hammers, regardless of their sex.

In the sample exchange, the supposed lack of knowledge regarding the relationship of China to Asia was cited as proof of the female's stupidity. I find this to be insufficient evidence for drawing such a conclusion, insofar as neither of the people in this exchange live in China or any other part of Asia. This exchange does, however, bring up a few points.

First, the fact that Asian girls are almost invariably perceived by Western males to be "hot". When I have asked young men to explain this attraction, at some point they admit that they like girls who are submissive. Let us set aside the discussion of whether such submissiveness in Asian girls is accurate - it is perceived, and the perception is an integral part of the attraction.

Second, in my experience, (as well as the experience of every other woman I've ever known) males of all ages are intimidated and therefore presumably turned off by any female they perceive as being more intelligent than themselves. When faced with the prospect of never getting a date, a girl with any intelligence can only respond by playing dumb. Her only other choice is to be true to herself and find herself without a date to the prom, thus condemning herself to a future as a humorless scholar.

Third, most of you young whippersnappers don't really know or care about where any place on earth is in relation to any other part. There are supposedly intelligent college students who were born in and are living in the state of Kansas who can't find it on a map of the United States. I'd be curious to know how many young folks in other places around the world could locate their own home on the globe.

I can hear most of you saying, oh boy, are Americans ever dumb. I'm afraid when it comes to younger people, I'd have to agree with you. (See my statement above regarding hammers...) The frightening part of all this is that one of the requirements for admission to a State university in Kansas is that the applicant has to have placed in the top third of their high-school graduating class. Upon hearing this, my poor beleagered husband exclaimed, "Good God! What must the other two-thirds be like!"

I would like to believe that Kansas is an exception and that graduating high-school seniors in the rest of the country are in better straits. Wrong. According to Department of Education statistics, Kansas is actually above average.

There are times when I truly despair for the future of my country...

But of course, anyone who lives in a factory can't be terribly bright, either...

My jaffa cake lodging is my business ! It is of choice. I could have gone to cambridge I swear !

Many young people yes are dull. But for God's sake this girl was NOT playing dumb.

My physics class is just all boys and 2 girls who don't know what's going on whereas the boys watch me predict sin values (sin 140 for example I said 0.65 today, and it was 0.64 on calculator) and explain why tan 90 is infinity, the girls just sit there and talk about christmas and ice skating.

Also girls act asif they be deep and caring for a boy's personality but in fact they are more shallow than boys. For example today I say hello to a random girl and she pokes my stomach and exclaims bloody hell you are on steroids! Then another one I see pokes my stomach and says ******* hell he has body armour. And now they do not stop looking at me. I am really not very nice to them at all. Not that I mind all these crazy compliments but it's indeed fully true that personality does not matter zum Y Chromosome. If you get an ugly boy giving a random girl arbitrate crinal strokes then they half of the time sue for sexual harrassment. With me they just ask me if I am smoking something.

I'm inclined to agree with Eleanor - although not entirely. Given the example of the inability to locate their home on a global map - the bishops's example of china's location: this are data issues, not processing.

I believe that to be "dumb" one lacks the ability to process data, not simply lack data. Whereas a person who has an enormous hard-disk is often considered to be smart, this is not necessarily so. Knowledge is not the same as intelligence, it is the product of the combination of the present data that defines one's intelligence.

Now indeed, Eleanor, people under 21 tend to seem dumb, because they lack data. This is not their fault as such however, it is a result of the data that is provided to them on a regular basis. e.g. I was watching this show on the succes of childrens' books like Harry Potter and The day my Bum Went Mad (or something like that). The glorious conclusion was that for a childrens book to be succesful (commercially that is), it must be fantastic, full of funny stories, but most of all: it must abandon every effort to teach children anything at all. Children don't want to learn, or so is the assumption, and will only buy what they want: ergo books without learning.

Further, it is an inevitable result of modern society that people become dumber - no, lack general data. Why? Specialisation. The enormous increase in specialisation means that for a person to be moderately succesful in one profession, they must spend an enormous amount of time studying just that one subject. This takes away time from the time to learn general things which are not immediately commercially viable, such as learning the location of either kansas or china.

Specialisation means less general knowledge. Continuing commercial viability demands increasing specialisation. As a community we will know more and more. As individuals less and less.

It just so happens that I am a female high-school student, and this is what I have to say.

In my school, the top-scoring students are boys. However, in the Honors/AP classes, girls outnumber boy 5 to 1. This implies that, while the smartest boys are smarter than the smartest girls, girls on average are smarter than boys. However I believe these statistics leave out a lot of the story. For example, I am one of the top-scorers of the girls (I was voted most intelligent girl in my class for two years in a row), but I will not put an extraordinary effort to get an extra 5 points on an assigment like the top-scoring boys. Perhaps the smartest girls, such as myself, conserve our effort better than the smartest boys.

However a lot of academic performance is based on culture, I believe. Most of the top-scorers boys are Asian, and most of the top-scoring girls have a touch of Jewish ancestry (although in the class one year ahead of me, the [bottle] blondes are the ones kicking academic butt). These are both cultures which for centuries have stressed literacy and scholarship as important skills to have if you expect to be anybody.

As far as the shallowness of girls, I except myself. In my personal life, my interest in clothes is that they are clean, comfortable, simple, and suitable for whatever I'm going to do, and beyond that I try to deal with clothes as little as possible. I keep myself clean, but beyond that I don't mess with hairspray or perfume or makeup for recreational purposes. I do find that frequently the things my female peers discuss or do in their free time are shallow, but at other times those very same peers have very intelligent ideas. I think a lot of the "shallowness" of girls is just their way of satisfying their social needs, and in fact they are smart human beings.

However my male peers are just as shallow - most of my peers who spend lunch playing video games in the various classrooms are males - boys talk in class just as much as girls, and they talk about things equally trivial - in my theatre classes, the girls are the ones who are doing their homework, and the guys are the ones who are slacking it. But as I said, the shallowness is not a reflection of actual intelligence, just how they satify their social needs, and I believe this applies to the males as much as it does to the girls. I consider my self more mature than most of my peers, but I still enjoy talking with them when they discuss things which interest me - which is often.

On youth being more naive due to lack of data, I wholly agree. It seems a lot of the art, especially writing, coming from young people is just a synthesis of what older people have told them about the world, rather than something they noticed for themselves (the exception to this is usually autobiography, since this is something the writer obviously has experienced). Sometimes I catch myself "duckspeaking", just recycling what some mentor of mine said, rather than something which I came to my own conclusion about. Most of my peers share the politics of their parents, and I wonder that, if they were raised in a different part of the country, would their politics be different. I wonder if my politics would be different. One time, when confronting my peers on this issue, they blithely replied "Just research the area and make your own ideas about it" which just means "take what a lot of adults say, and compile it in a way which suits your conditioning." It is difficult as hell to gather accurate and balanced information on an issue and come to an intelligent decision. It is double hard for someone like me who does not have the weight of direct experience to guide me - I guess the weight of experience I'm referring to is wisdom.

In conclusion, I think classifying either girls or boys as overall "shallow" a very slanted view, especially since "shallow" is such broad and imprecise term. In fact, it is the type of thing that young people, trying to simply the dauntingly complex world, would try to claim.

Who is telling the girls that in order for guys to like them they have to act stupid? Smart women are sexy! (Isn’t that right, GGG?) And I’m not the only one who thinks so. Many people find stupidity very unattractive, in either gender.

Kasper wrote:I was watching this show on the succes of childrens' books like Harry Potter and The day my Bum Went Mad (or something like that). The glorious conclusion was that for a childrens book to be succesful (commercially that is), it must be fantastic, full of funny stories, but most of all: it must abandon every effort to teach children anything at all. Children don't want to learn, or so is the assumption, and will only buy what they want: ergo books without learning.

The book is called, “The Day my Bum went Psycho”. And if nothing else, it should teach children the importance of washing their hands thoroughly before either eating or preparing food (judging by the title ).

As for the lack of data, I think specialisation is an auxiliary cause. Knowledge for knowledge’s sake was traditionally for the idle rich; who, neither wanting to be viewed as workers, nor needing the money from a professional qualification, found it perfect for their purposes: It is generally useful (despite what modern society thinks), and it became a way of differentiating them from the rest of society, (especially the wealthy professional classes, who had become as rich as they were).

With job security being low (meaning people only want a degree that the can see will take them somewhere), and with the old class-system replaced, the importance of knowledge for knowledge’s sake was decreased. Knowledge, which in the past would have been seen as a sign of refinement, would now be seen as wankery. *Cough* Greek and Latin *Cough* The effect goes beyond which uni courses people want to get into, to the general attitude to knowledge itself.

I also agree fully that knowledge indeed is not intelligence. Ignorance can be possessed by the sharpest of minds, also incredible lack of sharpness can be possessed by more intelligents. Hence there are all sorts of intelligences. Take for example me, Episcopum, and a random IQ test. Like ooh spell dat word backwards ooh what's the difference between dem pictures I would give it a finger and it's not my bloody indicem! I'm so proud of you Aldicks! Basically I would fail it because I don't give a damn. Even if I tried I'd fail. Because I see it subconsciously as pointless so would not try. Even if I managed to overcome this I would still be nothing special and probably bloody fail. At the same time I can hurt people with what is apparently high overall acadmic intelligence (but evidently only one type thereof). If however you were to give me one of those american vocabulary tests or whatever I would indeed fail for I don't read and my english vocabulary sucks. Round here you can go through the day using 10 words really : ****, blacks, be, like, no, yeah, bollocks, prick, wha, oo (who). Where **** and be can naturally have other verbal forms. Any one who expresses blackness as nigritude will just not understand, so there is no point! Also you will probably be beaten!

I have graded many exams & witnessed first hand, the stupidity of many college students, some of which are graduate students. I am not referring to ignorance, of which, I admit to being ignorant of many things. However, it would seem that common sense is no longer a trait that has been down to the younger generation.

Just to clarify...it is true that the University of Kansas has many students that are graduates of high schools from within that state, however, there are thousands of other students from around the country & the globe that also attend this school. A common thread exists among most of these students...they lack the gene that dictates good, common sense.

May I also add that the admission requirements posted by eleanor is relatively new. A few years back, any Kansas high school student may attend the University of Kansas or one of the regent schools. Taking the SAT was not required, and if a student took the ACT, I believe the score had to be at least a 12. Sad, truly it is.

All is not bleak, however. There are some rather exceptional students that have crossed my path, both male & female. I only wish that there were more of them.

I know I haven't said it lately (or at all!), but thank you, Episcopus, for your posts. They usually make me smile & laugh with your wicked sense of humor.

aww thanks eris, I appreciate this since I'm not getting much love lately!

I suppose I should agree with you here. To be sincere for once, you can not really generalize because that's ignorant. But I am ignorant and will still say girls are smelly! I know a girl who spends £2.30 (~$3.50) on a body spray which lasts her but 3 days! I ask her a WHYYYYYYY and she says 'ooh it smells nice'. However, every time she be spraying it I tell her to bugger off near the window for it give me a headache. Evidently I say no boys like it so why bother because we all know your main aim in life. The reply remains "ooh it smells nice". Can you say Dative of purpose? Sure as whiteoctave's first at cambridge she can't.

'Axe' is called 'Lynx' where Epi lives - I think. He lives in the Jaffa cakes department of the McVities Factory, where else? Anyway, I prefer the smell of body spray to that of smoke... damn, my spray is empty again, got to buy a new one...
No really, I normally just use deodorant, but some times it's just not enough to overpower the smell of the cigarettes, so I carry a little spray with me normally.

Upon reflection, I've decided to delete my ramblings on the poor judgment of some of my students. I would feel terrible if one were to come to this site & recognized the story. Mark this as example of poor judgment on my part as well as being insensitive to the feelings of others.

Last edited by eris on Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

My dad used to teach at a university and he could tell you some really scary stories about college students too. Like the lady whose little kid figured the problem out before she did. But I have faith in my generation yet.

I disagree with the idea that Western men like oriental women because they are submissive. If, for instance, a newly arrived oreintal woman will consider dating a white man -and many newly arrived ones wont, I know this for a fact- then the first thing she may want to know is how well you can provide for her if you happen to get married, meaning how much you make, how consistent you are at working, etc. If you dont seem to meet these standards, you are s*** out of luck. This is a wise course many white girls are too ignorant to even think about, and it doean't smack of submissiveness. I think that the attentiveness that oriental women often give their men is sometimes misinterpreted by those obsessed with egalitarianism as being 'submissiveness', when in fact it is not. And yes, that attentiveness is attractive, but it's not why I like oriental girls. It's the hot little bodies and black hair, and the eyes, and the exotic oriental curves......ahem! back to the discussion.........as for being intimidated by women who are more intelligent, I am not. I like smart girls if they are attractive. I dont equate high intelligence with superiority. It is only one aspect of a person's whole makeup, and highly intelligent people can be awfull dumb at times, or even crazy. We have the stereotype of the professor who rides a bike because he cant drive a car, and still manages to wreck all the time, or the tale of Einstein punching pregnant women in the gut (is this really true? I never could find out).

Anyway, I have seen intelligent female eyes that attracted me like a bug to a zapper, and almost with the same result, but that's all in the past now.